Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DeepSeek-V4-Flash Update

api-docs.deepseek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 362 posts

Re: DeepSeek-V4-Flash Update

#171

Post by lionkor »

innis226 wrote: post #94
lionkor wrote: post #50

I use deepseek for a lot of my personal day-to-day agent needs, and I will simply put this here and let this speak for itself, last 30 days: - Cost: $4.55USD - API requests: 3,467 - Tokens: 323,183,886 And as an engineer who leads a small team, I have very high standards for quality, and these carry across to my personal projects where I use deepseek. It has not disappointed at all for coding or review tasks. For eve…

But doesn't it hallucinate a lot? Does that affect your workflow?

It hallucinates plenty, about the same as Codex models and all other LLMs! I review all code it writes, thoroughly, check the test coverage, write tests myself, have other models/chats cross-check the work with a review skill (which I've shared in another comment in this thread).

Usually unreviewed code only gets committed if I really don't care, like for one-off scripts, which I sandbox with github.com/lionkor/sbh or run as an unprivileged user.

Re: DeepSeek-V4-Flash Update

#172

Post by indigodaddy »

egeozcan wrote: post #27

Every time I want to have fun coding something with natural language processing, I use deepseek flash. It's just incredible for the price. I have a fairly popular app with 400 users that uses DeepSeek in the background and it still didn't hit even 50 bucks of usage in a month.

Mind sharing the name? Sounds interesting.

Re: DeepSeek-V4-Flash Update

#173

Post by lionkor »

dakolli wrote: post #95
lionkor wrote: post #50

I use deepseek for a lot of my personal day-to-day agent needs, and I will simply put this here and let this speak for itself, last 30 days: - Cost: $4.55USD - API requests: 3,467 - Tokens: 323,183,886 And as an engineer who leads a small team, I have very high standards for quality, and these carry across to my personal projects where I use deepseek. It has not disappointed at all for coding or review tasks. For eve…

[flagged]

Aside from what squidbeak already said, I have to say the quality varies a lot, and goes above the "good" threshold enough times that using these models is worth the time and effort. Compared to something like GPT-5.4 to GPT-5.6 Codex models, they cost 50-100x less (fifty to one hundred TIMES less), and can do most annoying or well-specified tasks just as well.

The main difference is that deepseek is bad at prose, and Codex models are much more eager to use tools provided to them (which is usually fine, they often make like 3 todos via tool calls for a simple one step task which is silly though), and deepseek in general benefits from good instructions more than GPT models maybe do.

Deepseek becomes much better if you give it tools for asking clarifying questions, doing self-review with subagents, and so on. The more tools it uses, the better the signal-to-noise ratio in its context, and the more consistent the output.

You must still review 100% of the code as if it's trying to sell you insurance.

Re: DeepSeek-V4-Flash Update

#175

Post by mark_l_watson »

f311a wrote: post #38

I've been driving flash model for 90% of my tasks. It's better than pro (for unknown reasons), very cheap and fast. I try to keep changes under 1000 lines and drive architectural decisions myself, barely notice any difference compared to frontier models. The rest 10% is to spot bugs, security problems and to investigate better architecture, which flash can also do pretty well, I just cross check it. Faster iterations…

This is my experience also: DeepSeek v4 flash is good enough for most of my work and I like the fast response times. I buy tokens mostly from FireWorks.ai in the US, but I also prepaid for a large chunk of tokens directoy with DeepSeek.

I use OpenCode mostly (uses fewer tokens than Claude Code) and I am looking forward to the release of DeepSeek’s own coding harness.

Re: DeepSeek-V4-Flash Update

#176

Post by ai_fry_ur_brain »

lionkor wrote: post #173
dakolli wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Aside from what squidbeak already said, I have to say the quality varies a lot, and goes above the "good" threshold enough times that using these models is worth the time and effort. Compared to something like GPT-5.4 to GPT-5.6 Codex models, they cost 50-100x less (fifty to one hundred TIMES less), and can do most annoying or well-specified tasks just as well. The main difference is that deepseek is bad at prose, an…

[dead]

Re: DeepSeek-V4-Flash Update

#178

Post by dakolli »

squidbeak wrote: post #124
dakolli wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

An experienced software engineer (read his profile) praises the value he's found in Deepseek, and gives some real data showing how affordable that value is. Then you, dakolli - out of generosity and minute-to-minute devotion to enlightenment - sacrifice time from your busy day to sit down (though perhaps that's been painful lately?) or stand up with your phone - and offer a profound, deeply thought-out counterpoint i…

[flagged]

Re: DeepSeek-V4-Flash Update

#179

Post by the_lucifer »

kmarc wrote: post #130
kzrdude wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you notice any improvements with this update?

Not sure, haven't tried it today. Last night it single handedly implemented a feature after a grilling session, and came back with the red-yellow-green risk assessment points that I mostly saw with anthropic models. I had to check if I'm using the right model, but it was DS4Flash. So maybe I was using it already?

Possibly depending on who's routing it, since Openrouter seems to have added a separate slug for this, and they don't have an alias router for the DS models yet, so it shouldn't have swapped over to it in case you use them for routing.

If you are directly using it through Deepseek, they do mention that the flash slug has migrated over

Re: DeepSeek-V4-Flash Update

#180

Post by nchmy »

znnajdla wrote: post #119

The conspiracy theorist in me wants to think that the 80% drop in GPT 5.6 Luna prices today is correlated with this update from DeepSeek. Perhaps OpenAI has already hacked its competitors with it's Mythos-like models and is aware of what competitors are doing and is able to react in advance.

Seems to me that it's the reverse. Open ai dropped prices to compete with deepseek etc and then deepseek released this update to negate Luna.
Post reply on HN